Tafsir of Ibraheem 14:18

(The likeness of those who disbelieved in their Lord): An initial noun (mubtada') whose predicate is omitted—that is, "of that which is being recited to you" is their description, which is in its strangeness like a parable (mathal), as Sibawayh maintained.

His saying, Exalted is He: (Their deeds are as ashes): A sentence initiated to clarify their likeness. Ibn Atiyyah leaned toward it being an initial noun, and this sentence being its predicate. Al-Hufi objected to this, arguing that it is impermissible because the sentence lacks that which connects it to the initial noun, and it is not identical to it in meaning such that it could dispense with a connector, for it is obvious that the meaning is not "their likeness is this sentence." Al-Samin answered this by asserting that it is identical to it, because "the likeness of those who..." is in the interpretation of "that which is said regarding them and how they are described when they are described." Thus, there is no need for a connector, as in your saying: "Zayd’s attribute is that his honor is preserved and his wealth is expended." It is said: Its beauty is not hidden, except that the word "likeness" (mathal) is used here to mean "attribute" (sifah), and by "attribute" is meant the expression described by it, just as one says: "Zayd’s attribute is brown," meaning the expression by which he is described is this. Although this is a metaphor upon a metaphor, it is excused because the first is treated as a reality due to its fame. It is not an instance of the pronoun returning to the noun in the genitive construction (mudaf ilayh) because the noun in the genitive construction was mentioned only as a preamble for it, for that is weaker than the spider’s web, as you know.

Al-Kisa'i and Al-Farra' went to the view that "likeness" (mathal) is an inserted particle, and what follows it is preceded by it. Al-Hufi said: It is an initial noun, and "as ashes" is its predicate, while "their deeds" is a substitute (badal) for the initial noun—a substitute of inclusion (badal ishtimal), as in the saying: "What is with the camels, their walking is slow? Are they weary, not carrying anything, or iron-laden?" There is obscurity in this, and perhaps he considered the noun in the genitive construction.

In Al-Kashshaf, it is permitted for it to be a substitute for "the likeness of those who disbelieved," but upon the estimation of "the likeness of their deeds," so the estimation is: "The likeness of those who disbelieved is the likeness of their deeds, as ashes." It is stated in Al-Kashf: This is a total-for-total substitution, because their likeness and the likeness of their deeds are identical in essence, and therein is aggrandizement. It is also said: On this estimation, it is also a substitute of inclusion, because the likeness of their deeds is their being like ashes, and their likeness is that their deeds are like ashes, so there is no identity. However, the first is the cause of the second, so contemplate this.

Ash is well-known. Ibn Isa defined it as a substance pulverized by burning, pulverized like dust. It is pluralized as ramad for abundance and armad for scarcity; its pluralization as af'ila (e.g., armida') is anomalous. They said armida', as is in Al-Bahr. It is mentioned in Al-Qamus that al-armida' is like al-arbi'a' (Wednesday) for ashes, and he did not mention that it is a plural.

By "their deeds" is meant that which is in the category of virtues, such as maintaining kinship ties, freeing slaves, ransoming captives, entertaining guests, aiding the distressed, and so forth. It is said: It means what they performed for their idols as offerings in their estimation. It is also said: It encompasses both this and that, which is perhaps the most preferable.

The sentence was brought—as some have chosen—as an answer to what is said: "What is the status of the deeds they performed such that their affair resulted in that outcome?" For it clarifies that they are as (ashes, which the wind blew upon intensely)—that is, carried it and hastened away with it. Thus, ishtadat (blew intensely) means "rushed," and the ba is for transitivity or for concomitance. It is permitted that it be from shiddah meaning strength—i.e., it became strong by the concomitance of carrying it—(in a stormy day). Al-'asf is the intensity of the wind. A period of time is described by it upon the metaphorical attribution, like "his day is fasting" and "his night is standing," for the sake of hyperbole. Al-Harawi said: The estimation is "in a day of stormy wind," so he omitted the wind due to its mention preceding it, as in the saying: "When a day came, dark of sun, eclipsed." The tanwin in this case is a substitute for the noun in the genitive construction, and the weakness of this view is obvious. It is said that 'asif (stormy) is an adjective for the wind, but it was placed in the genitive case by proximity; the objection to this is that it is not valid to describe the wind with it due to their difference in definiteness and indefiniteness.

Nafi’ and Abu Ja’far read "the winds" (al-riyah) in the plural, and with that, the corruption of the adjectival quality intensifies. Ibn Abi Ishaq and Ibrahim ibn Abi Bakr narrated from Al-Hasan "in a stormy day" (fi yawm 'asif) as a genitive construction; this is, according to Abu Hayyan, from the omission of the described and the establishment of the adjective in its place—the estimation being "in a day of stormy wind." It is sometimes said that it is from the addition of the described to the adjective without the need for omission, according to those who see the permissibility of that.

(They have no power): That is, on the Day of Resurrection, (over anything of what they earned): In the world, from those deeds, (at all)—that is, they do not see that it is a trace of reward or a mitigation of punishment. This generalization is supported by what is related in the Sahih from Aisha, that she said: "O Messenger of Allah, Ibn Jud'an in the pre-Islamic era used to maintain kinship ties and feed the poor; does that benefit him?" He said: "It does not benefit him, for he never said: 'My Lord, forgive me my sins on the Day of Judgment'."

It is said the speech contains an omitted genitive noun: "They have no power over any reward for what they earned at all." The first view is more preferable. The first dependent element for "have no power" was advanced over the second, and the reverse occurred in Al-Baqarah due to the importance of each in its own verse; this is obvious to anyone with the slightest insight. The essence of the parable is the likening of their deeds—in their annulment and their going away as scattered dust, because they were built upon no foundation of the knowledge of Allah Almighty and faith in Him, and were not for His Face—to ashes that the stormy wind blew upon and scattered. This sentence is a summary of that, and the intent behind it is stated. It is said: The sufficiency in declaring the lack of seeing any effect for their deeds for the idols—even though they have punishments—is for the sake of declaring the falsehood of their belief and their assumption that they are intercessors for them with Allah Almighty, and in that is mockery of them.

(That): That is, what the parable indicates with a clear indication—from their misguidance while they reckoned that they were upon something—(is the far-reaching straying) from the path of Truth and correctness. The complete discussion on this has preceded not long ago.